alexis@panix.com wrote:
>
> Come to think of it, I wonder if fastrm by itself might not trigger this
> problem, even with the latest changes?
>
I don't expect so, at least not with only one fastrm. The "fix" from
Kirk handles a single process very effectively but doesn't scale. And
yes, the scenario you mentioned for news servers would probably fail
spectacularly with soft updates. Either the code needs to be further
improved, or such users can't use soft updates.
-- Ethan